ISIS: The "Islamic State" of Cowardice

We face an enemy that uses terror as surrogate manhood.  These are cowards that have been versed in Islamic heresy, but not versed in the historic bravery of Islam.  These are insane animals that find their manhood in the mutilation, beheading, and rape of women and children.  ISIS has gained territory through horrific acts in the face of a moral enemy.  Islam has finally disowned them and recognized that they do not represent the Qur'an or Islam.

One has to ask the question, "What defines a coward?"  Covering your face as you carry out the commands of "Allah" in front of the unbelievers?  If you truly have faith why would you fear to show your face?  Cowardice or lack of faith?

Why do you rape and kill women and children?  Obviously not to prove your manhood, as the mere suggestion of these atrocities evidence a severe lack of any manly traits.  It does not take a man to murder the helpless, weak, and innocent.  It does, however define the absolute best of the sociopathic trash societies have to offer.  There are rules to civilized warfare, if any war can be defined as civilized, and placing any weapons around schools, hospitals, and family neighborhoods to put the innocent at risk is anything but civilized.  The entire "civilized" world has signed off on these rules of warfare, only cowards do not comply. 

Point of order for the people of Islam:  Hamas, al-Qaeda, and the Taliban also do not represent Islam.  These are only three of many terrorist organizations that utilize the Qur'an as an excuse for violence against innocence.  They focus their insanity behind the "Sword verses" in the Qur'an instead of the "No-Compulsion verse."  Why would members of a peaceful religion that believes "there shall be no compulsion in religion" decide to throw their weight behind a misinterpretation of the verse, "...Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the last day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and his messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth."  Well, maybe the "religion of truth" has the same issues as the Christian Bible and the Hebrew Torah - conflicting verses and philosophies.

One has to ask why there are these conflicts in Holy Scriptures.  Re-writes and misinterpretations, stories handed down losing fact in favor of legend, and two factions with differing agendas?  These hidden agendas also create much controversy as to the origin of Bible stories.  Let us take a moment to review a paragraph from Wikipedia's History of the Quran and see if we can't use uncommon sense to see what the problem is with terrorist misinterpretations.  I have paragraphed the excerpt for ease of discussion:

The compilation of the written Qur'an (as opposed to the recited Qur'an) spanned several decades and forms an important part of early Islamic history.  Muslim accounts say it began in the year 610 when Gabriel appeared to Muhammad in the cave of Hira near Mecca, reciting to him the first verses of the Sura Iqra, thus beginning the revelation of the Qur'an.  Throughout his life, Muhammad continued to have revelations until before his death in 632. 

Muslim and non-Muslim scholars alike disagree on whether Muhammad compiled the Qur'an during his lifetime or if this task began with the first caliph Abu Bakr as-Siddiq (632-634).  Once the Qur'an was compiled, due to the unanimity of the sources, Muslims agree that the Qur'an we see today was canonized by Uthman ibn Affan (653-656). 

Upon the canonization of the Qur'an, Uthman ordered the burning of all personal copies of the Qur'an... The copy of Qur'an kept with wife of Muhammad named Hafsa was accepted for public.  Until then, several copies of Qur'an were available in different regions of Arabia with some grammatical errors, so Uthman's order allowed only one version of Qur'an to exist to prevent any misinterpretation of Qur'anic text or word of God (Allah).

Well, we can see Utrhman failed miserably to prevent misinterpretation of the Qur'anic text, but what of the other issues this information presents?  

There is disagreement, even in Islam, on who compiled the Qur'an.  Does this sound familiar?  The same disagreement is still at the heart of biblical controversy.  The "Qur'an we see today" is not the Qur'an written by Muhammad?  It is not the accurate "word of God (Allah)" as we are led to believe?  This would evidence a reliance on faith; a belief in one particular interpretation of the truth, not the truth itself.

And then there is the most damning evidence, for me, of a personal agenda at work to ensure control of the masses for eternity; the same kind of personal agendas that ultimately created the Vatican as an instrument to control the Christian masses.  "Uthman ordered the burning of all personal copies of the Qur'an."  How convenient for Uthman that no other copies would ever come to light showing changes that might be made to the Holiest of Islamic documents.  Changes that would control the faith of the populace, and changes that would ultimately reveal something that God would never have allowed if these truly represented the words of God (Allah).  Again, this is the same conflict we see in the Christian Bible.  God has included conflicting statements and philosophy?  I think all intelligent people need to understand that only man would knowingly corrupt a sacred text.

Islam is left with the same confusion as Christianity at this point.  Where does your faith in Holy Scripture lie, with the confusing interpretation of written text, or with faith in Allah's prophet that would never have allowed the confusion to occur.  If one wants to understand the conflict in the Qur'an, perhaps we should study the life and times of Muhammad.

Does the Qur'an say to saw off the heads of the enemy and take videos of it happening?  Does the Qur'an demand the murder of innocent children and women?  Does the Qur'an excuse the stealing and marriage of women against their will for the express purpose of excusing rape?  Does the Qur'an condone the mass murder of other Muslims because of differences in philosophy due to Qur'anic interpretation?  Has Christianity also found itself guilty of these same failings?  Yes.  The difference is that Christianity is trying, desperately, to focus their faith on God's intent for peace and love.  Christian's are in deep discussion over the inaccuracies and conflicts in our own scripture.  We are not continuing down this sick and twisted path of senseless murder and other crimes against humanity.  With all of the world conflict going on today this statement seems shallow at best and hard to prove at worst.  Governments and religions can come together and find common ground toward peace; we have always been capable of this.  ISIS is an insane group of sociopathic monsters.  They have no desire to cease the selfish satiation of their lust for money, sex, and power over innocence.  Basically everything not part of anybody's Holy Scripture.

ISIS does not represent Islam.  ISIS does not represent anything healthy for humanity.  ISIS is a cancer.  The only saving grace of ISIS, if one can find such a thing with these barbarians, is their ability to gather all of the heretics in one area so a worldwide coalition can eradicate the lion's portion of their heresy all at the same time.

ISIS should be a wakeup call to all of Islam that the splintering of their religion is not a healthy thing for world opinion and acceptance of their peaceful tenets.  Muslims must stand at the forefront of the coalition to excise this cancer in their midst that threatens all of Islam.